Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the case of Avion Funding v. GFS Industries (In re GFS Industries), 99 F.4th 223 (5th Cir. 2024), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that corporate debtors that elect to proceed under Subchapter V of Chapter 11 are, pursuant to Section 1192 of the Bankruptcy Code, subject to the discharge exceptions set forth in Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code. In so holding, the GFS court agreed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the only other circuit court to address this issue, in the case of Cantwell-Cleary v. Cleary Packaging (In re Cleary Packaging), 36 F.4th 509 (4th Cir. 2022).
In the GFS case, the debtor, GFS Industries LLC, entered into an agreement with Avion Funding LLC. pursuant to which Avion loaned money to GFS. To secure this obligation, Avion obtained a lien on certain of GFS's future receivables. As part of the agreement, GFS represented to Avion that it did not anticipate filing for bankruptcy. However, two weeks after signing the agreement, GFS filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. In its bankruptcy petition, GFS elected to proceed under Subchapter V of Chapter 11.
Avion filed a complaint against GFS in its bankruptcy case claiming that GFS fraudulently obtained Avion's financing by misrepresenting whether it anticipated filing for bankruptcy. In its complaint, Avion sought a declaration from the bankruptcy court that GFS's debt to Avion was nondischargeable due to these misrepresentations. GFS moved to dismiss Avion's complaint, arguing that the dischargeability exception on which Avion sought relief only applies to individual debtors.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.